NATURE, PRINCIPLES AND SCOPE OF EMPIRICISM

RELATED QUESTIONS
Ø What is empiricism?
Ø Argue the point whether empiricism holistically captures the problem of cognition in epistemology.
Ø Critically evaluate the nature, scope and fundamental principles of empiricism.



THE CONCEPT OF EMPIRICISM (the nature of empiricism)

          Regarding its etymology, it is said that the term “empiricism” has a dual etymology. Firstly, it derives from a Latin word “experientia” which translates as “experience”. Secondly, it derives from a Greek word “empeiria” which refers to “skill derived from practical experience”. In philosophy, empiricism is a theory of knowledge, which emphasizes the absolute role of experience (sensory perception or physical experience) in the formation of concrete ideas, and knowledge. Even in the philosophy of science, empiricism is perceived as those experiences derived via conscious experimental procedures. Thus, empiricism is a basic requirement of the scientific method, as all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of our natural world. So, science is methodically empirical in nature. This is the reason why it is almost not possible to talk of science without empiricism and vice-versa, as most philosophers of science habitually refer to empiricism and some epistemologists (like Descartes and Bacon) introduce the scientific method into their empiricism.

          So, what is empiricism? Empiricism is the theory that experience rather than reason is the source of knowledge, and in this sense, it is opposed to rationalism. But, it should be noted that those philosophers who have been labelled empiricists are united only in their general tendency (of experience being the major source of knowledge) and may differ in ideas in various ways. Experience on the other hand has at least two meanings. First of all it can mean conscious awareness i.e. to be in a certain mental state. Sense experience is an example of this initial sort of experience. On the other hand, experience can also refer to a series of events that you have gone through from which you have perhaps learned something like a job experience.

          To say that we have learned something from experience is to say that we have come to know of that thing by the use of our senses. Thus, we have experience when we are sufficiently aware of what we have discovered via our senses. There is another, perhaps connected, sense of the term "experience" in which sensations, feelings, desires and the likes, are experiences in themselves of which, to perceive them involves having sense experiences. Obviously, these are experiences because awareness of them is something that happens to us. The statement that experience is the source of knowledge simply means that knowledge depends ultimately on the use of the senses and on what is discovered through them.

FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF EMPIRICISM

          Although it is made clear that the roots of empiricism can be traced back to the pre-socratic era of the Greek cosmologists whom were basically materialists and nature philosophers, clear pointers to the emergence of the empiricist tradition began with Aristotle. Aristotle, whom insisted that knowledge is based on sensory experience, is often regarded as an empiricist on four grounds, which form the fundamental principles of empiricism. These are evaluated below;

     i.        The rejection of the theory of innate ideas

Rationalists (like Descartes) promote as evidently true, the concept of clear and distinct ideas being referred to as substances of the mind such as, God, being, soul, matter, cause, number, time, space, motion and the likes. Nevertheless, empiricists outrightly and generally reject this view, holding that ideas are not naturally inherent in the mind, but are put there as mental concepts of our experience.

   ii.        True knowledge proceeds from sense perception

It is a very basic principle of empiricism to regard the senses as superior to reason. Thus, they present sensation as the door to the acquisition of knowledge. Every serious empiricist would thus disagree with the rationalist ideology of knowledge being acquired via reasoning.

 iii.        The human mind being tabula rasa at birth

Empiricists hold that our mind at birth is like a clean slate which is ready to be written upon. Thus, experience is like that ink used to inscribe ideas upon our mind as well as give character to our mind. That is why empiricists hold the idea that “there is nothing in the intellect which was not first in the senses”.

 iv.        There is nothing in the mind, which was not previously in the senses
As pioneered by Aristotle, it has become a common view, amongst empiricists that there is nothing in the mind, which was not previously in the senses. Thus, sense perception is the doorway via which knowledge in the form of concepts and ideas pass through before it is ever reflected on and cognised by the mind.


A HISTORICAL VIEW OF EMPIRICISM FROM INCEPTION UNTIL CONTEMPORARY TIMES

          Empiricism is not a recent school of thought. It has been practiced right from the very beginning of the philosophical tradition as pioneered by the Greeks. In a very brief but systematic manner, the development of empiricist thought is presented below;

Ø The early Greek cosmologists were natural philosophers, some of whom were materialists whom postulated a concrete element as the underlying unity of the universe. Examples of such are Thales and Heraclitus whom respectively postulated water and fire as the underlying unity of the universe.

Ø The Sophists, whom are usually recognized as the first empiricists, were known to outrightly reject the rationalistic speculations about the nature of the world which were promoted by some philosophers before them. Instead, via their skeptical-rhetoric arguments, they actually focused on concrete entities such as man and society.

Ø Aristotle did not reject Plato's theory of intelligible forms outright, but he insisted that they were not separately existing, timeless entities. Instead, he argued, that these forms were an offshoot of material things, which can be known through sensory experience. He said that we gain knowledge by being affected by what he called the sensible form of things. Thus, he was deeply critical of the highly rationalistic approach of Plato. In essence, Aristotle held that true knowledge proceeds from experience.

Ø The stoics claimed that the human mind is a clean slate which came to be occupied with ideas according to what the senses perceive. This was a strong anticipation of the tabula rasa theory of Locke. They further held the view that since knowledge is dependent on experience and since the objects of experience are particular concrete things, it is not possible to possess knowledge of general or universal ideas.

Ø The epicurean philosophers held that mental concepts are ideas, which are as a result of our previous sense experience. Also, sensations are clear evidence of their causes which are obviously concrete. Epicurus himself maintained that the test of the truth or otherwise of judgment is experience.

Ø Saint Thomas Aquinas, a medieval scholastic and follower of Aristotle, is popularly known for his empiricist theory that “there is nothing in the intellect which was not first in the senses”. Thus, experience and sensation precedes ideas and reason. He even argued that the existence of God could be proved by reasoning from sense data.

Ø In the modern period, empiricism was somewhat unique in that all empiricists had a common agenda of establishing a strong epistemological foundation for science. For example, Francis Bacon developed a system of empiricism that possesses the characteristics of induction, explanation, experimentation, observation and explained that knowledge via experience must be based on facts that could be observed and experimented. John Locke’s empiricism had as its purpose "to inquire into the original, certainty, and extent of human knowledge, together with the grounds and degrees of belief and opinion. His main target for attack was the rationalist doctrine of innate ideas, the doctrine that there may be ideas with which we are born or which we do not have to derive from sense experience.

Ø Empiricists in the twentieth century, like Bertrand Russell have generally focussed on the radical distinction between necessary truths, as found in logic and mathematics, and empirical truths, as found elsewhere. They confine necessity of truth however, to logic and mathematics, and all other truths are thus taken to be merely uncertain. Twentieth-century empiricists have tended to call themselves "Logical Empiricists" (at least those who have been connected in one way or another with logical positivism).

EPISTEMOLOGY AS A THEORY OF COGNITION (the scope of empiricism)

          As the mother of empiricism, one basic task which epistemology sets out to accomplish is to create and develop standards for making thinking to be rigorous, critical and evidence based. In order for epistemology to validate sure knowledge, it thoroughly analyzes and rigorously evaluates human judgement of things. So, for it to systematically achieve this basic task, epistemologists do ask some fundamental questions that center on knowledge; questions on the object of knowledge, the meaning of knowledge, the constituents of knowledge and the methodology of knowledge.

          Accordingly, as a theory of cognition, epistemology is a theory of thinking in that, one of its essential tasks is to prove that human thought is a pure act of unity. What this implies is that the human mind has capacity and ability to organise the poly-dimensional experiences of life into a mono-dimensional concept. This implies that the human mind can create order out of the chaos in our universe. In doing this, the human mind establishes those rules by which we can minimize error and overcome doubt, so that we can be confident to vouch for the certainty of our knowledge.

          Furthermore, it is a fact that (western) epistemology began as a result of the sceptics trying to deny the obvious claims of the pre-socratic philosophers whom established that some material (like water for Thales) or immaterial elements (like Nous for Anaxagoras) are responsible for the existence of everything in the universe. The process of the epistemologists attempting to respond to the outrageous claims of these sceptics was what then gave way to the existence of the epistemic schools of rationalism and empiricism. This clearly presents doubt (or the act of doubting) as the major element or ingredient upon which any epistemological activity holds ground. However, there remains the argument whether it is either rationalism or empiricism (or maybe both) that can adequately fulfil the task of epistemology as a theory of cognition.

 Back to "300 LEVEL- SECOND SEMESTER"

Back to "ARCHIVES AND RESOURCES"

Back to "PHILUZOPHY"